Nintendo 3DS

[AmishSamurai]

But, abstractly, the core idea of a gimmick being negative is that there's no substance beyond that initial attraction. And to be perfectly honest, that definition is broader than the way it's being used in this thread.

This. A Gimmick is only bad if that's all something has going for it.

[ejamer]

StreetPass feels like a "gimmick" to me, but one that is fresh and fun and still makes me excited about silly things like taking a bus ride or going to the mall just because you don't know what will happen. (Will you pass someone else who has been enjoying Resident Evil and get an infection mission to complete? Or get the last piece of that puzzle you've been working on?) It doesn't improve a bad game, but can make good games even more engrossing as there is a "real life" component added.

AR, on the other hand, is a gimmick that I could live without. I've never seen a convincing result outside of professional demos and haven't played an AR game that was even borderline enoyable. Can't believe that Sony is biting on AR garbage with the Vita too...


One gimmick that I wish would've been added for 3DS is trophies/achievements. Now THAT is a cheap gimmick -- but a very successful one that has given a lot of people a lot of pointless enjoyment.

[GameMasterGuy]

AR games do suck, however AR can also be used for scanning AR cards, which will hopefully become the successor to e-Reader cards.

[sabrage]

AR games do suck, however AR can also be used for scanning AR cards, which will hopefully become the successor to e-Reader cards.

...Because e-reader cards weren't gimmicky or annoying at all.

I hope the next generation gets rid of the cameras and touch screens and bullshit. Give me two analog sticks, four shoulder buttons and a halfway decent d-pad (seriously, what happened Nintendo?) and we'll be straight.

[KDub]

I had more fun with the AR cards than the games as well.

I am however interested in giving Spirit Camera a try.

[ejamer]

AR games do suck, however AR can also be used for scanning AR cards, which will hopefully become the successor to e-Reader cards.

...Because e-reader cards weren't gimmicky or annoying at all.

I hope the next generation gets rid of the cameras and touch screens and bullshit. Give me two analog sticks, four shoulder buttons and a halfway decent d-pad (seriously, what happened Nintendo?) and we'll be straight.

I like the idea of having cameras, but the quality (Vita and 3DS both) isn't good enough to be useful for very much outside of scanning QR codes or snapping incredibly low quality snapshots - the kind that might be acceptable for twitter-like messaging.

And as for touch controls, I'd be sad to see them removed or ignored. Many of my favorite games use traditional controls, but a few really good ones make use of touch controls. Why limit your control options when touch can be completely optional anyway?

I guess my stance is that I'd like to see varied control/hardware options available, but only used where effectively. Something like AR functionality could be cool, but I don't feel the hardware (camera quality and processing) is good enough to do anything impressive right now - or at least the impressive applications haven't been seen yet.

[sabrage]

And as for touch controls, I'd be sad to see them removed or ignored. Many of my favorite games use traditional controls, but a few really good ones make use of touch controls. Why limit your control options when touch can be completely optional anyway?

Completely optional? If I want to play any Vita game, I am forced to use the touch screen just to launch the game, to say nothing of the games themselves. That's the opposite of "optional."

[GameMasterGuy]

The touch screen is required for a few games that wouldn't work any other way, such as The World Ends With You. Screw it, that game counters any argument saying any single part of the DS is gimmicky, from the mic to the second screen to the very fact that you can close it to enter sleep mode.

[ejamer]

And as for touch controls, I'd be sad to see them removed or ignored. Many of my favorite games use traditional controls, but a few really good ones make use of touch controls. Why limit your control options when touch can be completely optional anyway?

Completely optional? If I want to play any Vita game, I am forced to use the touch screen just to launch the game, to say nothing of the games themselves. That's the opposite of "optional."

But that's an interface design issue - not a problem with touch controls per se. My 3DS doesn't have that issue at all (although it does have other nits that could be picked).

Games and developers that choose to use touch controls should do so because it suits the game - not because it's mandated or introduces a sense of "novelty". When shoehorned into places where they don't make sense, touch controls can be really lame... but fault usually lies with the designer/developer in that case, not the hardware.

In the same way, I'd hate to see games that work best with touch controls shoehorned into standard controls. The tech is cheap enough, why not give developers more tools to work with instead of fewer?

[sabrage]

And as for touch controls, I'd be sad to see them removed or ignored. Many of my favorite games use traditional controls, but a few really good ones make use of touch controls. Why limit your control options when touch can be completely optional anyway?

Completely optional? If I want to play any Vita game, I am forced to use the touch screen just to launch the game, to say nothing of the games themselves. That's the opposite of "optional."

But that's an interface design issue - not a problem with touch controls per se. My 3DS doesn't have that issue at all (although it does have other nits that could be picked).

Games and developers that choose to use touch controls should do so because it suits the game - not because it's mandated or introduces a sense of "novelty". When shoehorned into places where they don't make sense, touch controls can be really lame... but fault usually lies with the designer/developer in that case, not the hardware.

In the same way, I'd hate to see games that work best with touch controls shoehorned into standard controls. The tech is cheap enough, why not give developers more tools to work with instead of fewer?

Because the issue wouldn't exist at all if the touch screen wasn't there. Honestly, thinking back on my DS, the one and only game I thought used the touch screen well was Trauma Center. And it was a brilliant game! But was it worth suffering through Phantom Hourglass? Probably not. I don't want developers dumping all this shit on their products because instead of really, truly working to make great games and selling their systems like that, they're pouring on the gimmicks and features to blind the iPhone devotee... But those people already have an iPhone! And that's a device with a completely different toolset and purpose (if the same target market) than a dedicated gaming device. I don't want to have to frantically swipe the screen to make Nathan Drake fight a fucking piece of cloth. I don't want to shout at my DS like a complete idiot on the bus. I don't want any of these terrible little things that developers feel compelled to do with new hardware, and the few games that are truly designed and built for it aren't worth the other 90% that are made that much worse for it.

Oh, and I don't have enough eyes or hands for The World Ends With You. Could be a brilliant game; I thought it was busy and cramped and confusing.